Word-of-mouth communications can be very persuasive. You’re more likely to see a movie or buy a clothing brand because your friends recommended them. This is viral marketing. However, marketers are harnessing the power of viral marketing with creative tactics. So called ‘stealth marketing’ are criticized because consumers don’t know they are being marketed to. For example, Sony Ericsson came under fire when it became known that it hired actors to pose as tourists asking strangers to take their picture with the cool T68i phone. Wal-Mart was criticized for a blog about Laura and Jim RVing around America, stopping at Wal-Marts across the country and writing glowing things about the retailer. Wal-Mart never disclosed that it was sponsoring the trip.

Stealth Marketing initiatives are not openly presented as promotional tactics. Learn more about this practice by doing internet research and decide if it is ethical. Can some of the tools used in public relations be considered stealth marketing? How about product placement in movies or television shows?

Procter & Gamble, while not paying moms to talk about its products, provides samples and coupons to these influential people recruited into their Vocalpoint network (www.vocalpoint.com) in hopes that they say positive things about them to others. Is this an example of viral marketing or of stealth marketing?

( Please answer 1 to 23 in your own word respectively)

HOW ARE INDIAN CONSUMERS EXPLOITED-

1.DECEPTIVE SELLING PRACTICES,

2.FALSE AND MISLEADING ADVERTISEMENTS,

3. Exorbitant prices of products and services

4.DEFECTIVE QUALNY, HIGHER PRICES,

5.SALE OF HAZARDOUS PRODUCTS TO IGNORANT CONSUMERS,

6. SUPPRESSION OF MATERIAL INFORMATION,

7. FALSE PRODUCT DIFFERENTIATION,

8.PRODUCERS'/SELLERS' COLLUSION,

9.SUPPLY OF ADULTERATED AND SUBSTANDARD PRODUCTS

10.CHEATING CONSUMERS BY GIVING LESSER QUANTITY FOR THE PRICE,

11.DISHONOURED GUARANTEES AND WARRANTIES,

12.POOR REDRESSAL OF CUSTOMERS' GENUINE GRIEVANCES,

13.MAKING CONSUMER BUY UNWANTED GOODS, CREATING A SCARE OUT OF SCARCITY,

14.MISLEADING REPRESÈNTATION ON UTILITY OF PRODUCTS,

15.MANIPULATING CONDMONS OF DELIVERY,

16.CUSTOMERS PAY FOR NUMEROUS INTERMEDIARIES,

17. FALL IN PRICES -NEVER PASSED TO CONSUMERS,

18.BUYING UNAFFORDABLE GOODS,

19.ADVERTISEMENT COST,

20. COUNTERFEITS CONSTITUTE SUBSTANTIAL QUANTITY OF GOODS IN STORE SHELVES,

21.HOARDING AND BLACK-MARKETING,

22.TIE-IN-SALES,

23.GIFTS FOR PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Explain this factor in your own word.

Write a 350- to 525-word paper in which you complete the following:

Explain the difference between permanent and temporary working capital, and describe what a firm could do to minimize risk.

Evaluate how small adjustments made to total cash conversion can have a large impact upon the financial health of a company.

Describe Economic Order Quantity (EOQ Using the EOQ formula and an example product for your business, determine the optimal quantity of the item to purchase that will help to minimize the annual total costs of keeping that item in inventory.

Describe what a Just-in-Time (JIT) inventory system is and its significance in reducing inventory costs.

Please answer the following question in 450 word count on the following about Patient abuse. Please answer all bullet points in your answer in your own words. If citing material make sure to add all peer review reference at the end of question.

• Identify at least 3 state or federal laws that are relevant to the case, and complete the following:

o Evaluate key legal factors that are inherent in the case.

o Assess various policies and procedures that are inherent in these laws that relate to the provision of health care by providers or patient rights.

Please answer the following question in 450 word count on the following about Patient abuse. Please answer all bullet points in your answer in your own words. If citing material make sure to add all peer review reference at the end of question.

Identify policies at the federal, state, and local levels relating to the provision of health care and patient rights that played the following roles in the case:

o Assesses opposing views of these policies from the perspectives of the provider and patient

o Analyzes the implications of these policies on the operations of health care organizations

Please answer the following question in 450 word count on the following about Patient abuse.

Please answer all bullet points in your answer in your own words. If citing material make sure to add all peer review reference at the end of question.

• Patient abuse

• Analyze the ethics of the case from each end of the ethical spectrum (ultraconservative to ultraliberal) from the perspective of 3 of the following stakeholders:

o Patient,

o Patient’s immediate family or guardians

o Emergency medical personnel or first responders

o Doctors, surgeons, specialists, or other medical providers

o The hospital or health care facility

o A pharmaceutical or medical device company

Please answer the following question in 450 word count on the following about Patient abuse. Please answer all bullet points in your answer in your own words. If citing material make sure to add all peer review reference at the end of question.

• Formulate an assessment of the potential impact of the case on decision-making options in the future for providers, patients, and administrators

Print "Censored" if userInput contains the word "darn", else print userInput. End with newline.

Note: These activities may test code with different test values. This activity will perform three tests, with userInput of "That darn cat.", then with "Dang, that was scary!", then with "I'm darning your socks.". See "How to Use zyBooks". .

Also note: If the submitted code has an out-of-range access, the system will stop running the code after a few seconds, and report "Program end never reached." The system doesn't print the test case that caused the reported message.

#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;

int main() {
string userInput;

userInput = "That darn cat.";

/* Your solution goes here */

return 0;
}

Print "Censored" if userInput contains the word "darn", else print userInput. End with newline. Ex: If userInput is "That darn cat.", then output is:

Censored

Ex: If userInput is "Dang, that was scary!", then output is:

Dang, that was scary!

Note: If the submitted code has an out-of-range access, the system will stop running the code after a few seconds, and report "Program end never reached." The system doesn't print the test case that caused the reported message.

#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;

int main() {
string userInput;

getline(cin, userInput);

int isPresent = userInput.find("darn");
if (isPresent > 0){
cout << "Censored" << endl; /* Your solution goes here */

return 0;
}

Review the case study provided below. In an APA-formatted Word document of at least 550 words, write an essay in which you answer the following four questions: 1. How would you describe the culture of Siemens before Kleinfeld's appointment as CEO? 2. Kleinfeld's leadership style was criticized as being “brash” and “American.” Is that a fair assessment? Why or why not? 3. Do you think the decision to “clean house” in the Siemens executive offices was the right one? Why or why not? 4. What challenges does Peter Löscher face in restoring the company's reputation?

Siemens' Commitment to “Clean Hands”

After CEO Klaus Kleinfeld put Siemens back on the road to recovery, a bribery scandal threatened to undo all the progress made. If things had turned out a little differently, Siemens CEO Klaus Kleinfeld might already be on his way to executive stardom, like his role model Jack Welch. Just two years after Kleinfeld took over the Munich electronics and engineering behemoth in January 2005, Siemens was on track to hit its aggressive internal earnings targets for the first time since 2000. In fact, it was expanding both sales and profits 168 faster than Welch's former domain, General Electric. The 2006 sales rose by 16 percent and profits by 35 percent, and the future was looking very positive.

Transforming Siemens was never going to be easy. With branches in 190 countries and over $100 billion in sales, the company has long been respected for its engineering expertise but criticized for its sluggishness. And Germany, with its long-standing tradition of labor harmony and powerful workers' councils, is highly resistant to the kind of change Kleinfeld tried to implement.

Against the odds, in just two years Kleinfeld had managed a major restructuring. He pushed Siemens' 475,000 employees to make decisions faster and focus as much on customers as on technology. He spun off underperforming telecommunications businesses and simplified the company's structure. When one group of managers failed to deliver, he broke up an entire division—at the end of 2005, it became clear that the Logistics & Assembly Systems Division, which made products such as sorting equipment used by the U.S. Postal Service, would deliver only a 2 percent profit margin. Most unpardonable in Kleinfeld's eyes was that the unit's managers waited too long to alert him to the problem. So Kleinfeld transferred the most profitable parts of the division, such as baggage-handling systems for airports, to other parts of Siemens. The rest was sold. Within weeks, an entire Siemens division with $1.9 billion in annual sales was vaporized.

Such aggressive tactics would inevitably lead to criticism of Kleinfeld's “American” style of leadership, but his eventual departure from Siemens (he is now CEO of aluminum giant Alcoa) came not, as many suspected, as a result of secret boardroom maneuvers. It came as a result of a need for a fresh start for the company after a scandal over bribery and corruption practices by senior managers to the tune of an estimated $2.5 billion.

In December 2008, Siemens announced that it would pay fines and other penalties totaling $800 million after pleading guilty in U.S. federal court to violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The company also agreed to pay $540 million to German authorities in addition to a $274 million fine already levied for evidence of systematic bribery and corruption, including the use of airline tickets that could be exchanged

for cash, which executives in Siemens' medical division used to bribe clients in contract negotiations. Kleinfeld's eventual departure from Siemens came not, as many suspected, as a result of secret boardroom maneuvers, but as a result of a need for a fresh start for the company after a scandal over bribery and corruption practices by senior managers to the tune of an estimated $2.5 billion.

Thanks to full cooperation and transparency in the investigation, in addition to a multibillion-dollar internal investigation in which Siemens provided most of the evidence for its own prosecution, the company did not receive a ban from competing for future government contracts. However, having clearly demonstrated that much of its commercial prowess was achieved through a willingness to “grease the appropriate

palms” to win large government contracts from Nigeria to Norway, Siemens faced the challenge of rebuilding its reputation and proving that it can win business honestly (with “clean hands”)—even when competitors may continue to acquiesce to demands for bribes in order to win contracts.

The responsibility for rebuilding the company's reputation fell to Peter Löscher, as a designated (and untainted) outsider who previously headed divisions at GE (Siemens' greatest rival) to draw a line under the scandal and start a new era for the company. One of his first acts was to declare an amnesty for all 169 managers to come forward and share what they knew about the bribery practices—110 managers came forward and provided multiple new leads to internal and external investigators.

With Löscher's arrival and the need to wipe the slate clean, there was a dramatic housecleaning in the executive offices in addition to a cosmetic restructuring of the organization into three main divisions: industry, energy, and health care. It remains to be seen whether the restructuring is designed to improve operational efficiency or to make units more attractive to potential buyers.